Mr C Fray, Equality Officer For the v Respondent — 2024

Claim B against the RMT and Ms S Jensen was withdrawn straight after lunch on day two of the hearing. The tribunal recorded that the matter had proceeded as a race discrimination claim. In relation to Ms Jensen, it found that the claimant had seen and used the draft appeal wording she had sent, and that the later email showed the change of strategy had prompted her response about continuing to represent him. In relation to the RMT, the tribunal found there was no evidence that its original refusal to give legal assistance on 28 February 2023 was because of race.

On the respondents' costs application under Rule 76(1)(a) and/or (b), the tribunal accepted that Claim B had no reasonable prospect of success and that the proceedings had been conducted unreasonably. It nevertheless noted that the claimant had brought the claim in good faith, that costs in the tribunal are exceptional, and that the fault lay with his representative rather than with him. Because the representative was not acting for profit, the tribunal said it could not make a wasted costs order under Rule 80(2), and it therefore ordered only a nominal contribution of £10 towards the respondents' costs.